Wisconsin anti-abortion group seeks further regulations

The state's largest anti-abortion group sees opportunities to place further regulations on abortion, including requiring women seeking the procedure to view an ultrasound of their fetuses.

Wisconsin Right to Life is also proposing banning abortions that would cause pain to the fetus, barring abortions that are sought based on the sex of the fetus and prohibiting the ability of state employees to use their state health care plans to get access to abortions.

"I support all those measures and would gladly be a lead or co-sponsor on any of them," said Rep. Joel Kleefisch, R-Oconomowoc. "Any measure to protect life is of the utmost highest priority."

Requiring ultrasounds and banning certain abortions based on fetal pain follow a wave of legislation around the country. Backers of abortion say if put into law in Wisconsin, they could prompt lawsuits.

"These bills represent much of what we're seeing across the country," said Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research group that supports abortion rights.

Abortion opponents were disappointed by President Barack Obama's re-election and the ability of Democrats to retain control of the U.S. Senate. But Wisconsin Right to Life noted in an email to supporters that the election also put all of Wisconsin's state government in the hands of Republicans.

"The silver lining in the November 6 elections is that Wisconsin has a right-to-life governor, Scott Walker, and strong right-to-life majorities in both houses of the Legislature!" the group's email newsletter said.

Advertisement

As of Sunday, Nov. 25, Walker had yet to weigh in on the specific proposals.

"As you know, Governor Walker is pro-life," Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie said in a statement. "With that said, he hasn't gotten a chance to meet with Wisconsin Right to Life regarding their agenda or discuss it with legislators."

Sen. Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin) said she backed all four proposals but had not decided how she would prioritize them.

Last session, Lazich worked on a bill that would have required that ultrasounds be given to those seeking abortions but she did not introduce it. She chalked that up to a lack of time during a tumultuous session that saw Senate Democrats leave the state for three weeks in a failed attempt to block a GOP plan to limit collective bargaining for public workers.

"Now we've got a little more time," she said of the upcoming session.

Democrats promised to fight the proposals.

"They didn't campaign on this," Rep. Sandy Pasch, D-Shorewood, said of Republicans. "They campaigned on jobs and the economy. ... It's really misplaced priorities and it's not what the people from our state or the nation are most concerned about."

Eight states require women seeking abortions to get ultrasounds, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Two of those states -- Louisiana and Texas -- also require that the ultrasound screen be situated so the woman receiving it can view the ultrasound. Additionally, North Carolina and Oklahoma have passed similar laws, but they are on hold while they are being challenged in court.

Wisconsin Right to Life has not spelled out its exact proposal, and the group's legislative director, Susan Armacost, did not return a call. But the brief description of the measure in its email newsletter indicated it would go further than any other state by requiring the woman seeking the abortion to view the ultrasound. In other states, women have the option of looking away.

Lazich said she has worked with women who regret getting abortions and that she believes viewing an ultrasound could dissuade women from going through with them.

Nash, of the Guttmacher Institute, said there is little research on whether such laws change women's minds, in part because the laws are so new.

"All of this is about telling a woman she should continue her pregnancy," Nash said. "It's really a shaming tactic."

Ultrasounds are fairly commonly given before abortions, but Nash criticized such laws because they require ultrasounds even when they aren't medically necessary.

That can add $50 to $250 to the cost of an abortion. The median cost of an abortion in 2008 was $470, according to Guttmacher.

Many states that have passed such bills have required that the ultrasounds be given 24 hours or more in advance. Nash said that can create logistical difficulties for women who may need to take another day off from work for the clinic appointment.

Another proposal would ban abortions at around 20 weeks, based on the belief by some that fetuses can feel pain at that point. Past court rulings have said abortions must be available up to around 24 weeks, and fetal pain laws are an attempt to scale back when abortions can be provided.

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said the available science has not shown fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks. Abortion opponents, however, point to studies that say they can.

Nebraska in 2010 was the first state to ban abortions around 20 weeks based on fetal pain, and others quickly followed. Georgia has approved a similar law that will take effect in January, bringing the number of states with such laws in effect to eight, according to Guttmacher.

A fetal-pain law in Wisconsin would affect an extremely small number of abortions because 90 percent of abortions are provided at 12 weeks or before, said R. Alta Charo, a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin Law School. Abortions performed at 20 weeks and thereafter tend to be ones where serious health problems develop for the woman, she said.

Another proposal would ban women from getting abortions if they were doing it because of the child's gender. Sex-selection abortions have occurred in countries such as China and have been seen among some immigrant communities in the United States, according to Guttmacher.

Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, said he particularly wants to advance the ban on sex-selection abortions because Democrats have accused Republicans in recent years of conducting a "war on women." He said there was nothing more pro-woman than preventing abortions that are sought because of a child's sex.

"I think as we get more immigrants from other countries we have to be particularly attuned to the abortion industry conniving with people to reduce the number of women in our society," Grothman said.

Pasch called Grothman's comment ridiculous.

"I don't know how to respond to such nonsense," Pasch said. "This isn't the first time Sen. Glenn Grothman has proposed or sponsored legislation based on nonsense."